Vax Whalloped

[Eagle94-A1]

42 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

 I hear the second time isn't as bad, and nobody knows how long the anti-bodies last.

I'll let y'all know. 

Some of the studies I've read say about 6 months.

[JoeBob]

2 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Some of the studies I've read say about 6 months.

I've read of the studies that say six months. 

The early briefings over at Emory, where I was working to add capacity, initially said that anti-bodies should protect you for 4 months. 

My tax lady was hospitalized with Covid in February, before they really knew what it was.  She tested positive for anti-bodies 8 months later in September.

And now vaccines are good for a year?  My curiosity is piqued when your body produces a longer lasting immune response from a sparring match against a fake virus (vaccine), than is developed from a nine round title match against the real Covid.

[qwazse]

14 hours ago, JoeBob said:

I've read of the studies that say six months. ...

And now vaccines are good for a year?  My curiosity is piqued when your body produces a longer lasting immune response from a sparring match against a fake virus (vaccine), than is developed from a nine round title match against the real Covid.

So, we are certain about the six month mark because that’s how long most everyone in the trials had to be before the FDA would offer emergency authorization. For the few folks who had been in each trial for more than six months, everyone was still testing positive at the same rate, but the placebo group was still coming down with moderate or severe COVID-19 symptoms many times more frequently than the vaccinated group. We will know in May if that holds true for everyone who completes the trial. Based on the marginal rates so far, my money is on the vaccine. But, as a statistician over the years, I’ve seen a few pre-hatched eggs over-counted.

Natural immunity is a crap shoot. One would think that there ain’t nothing like the real thing, but viruses call B.S. on that line of reasoning. A body may commit to memory the antibodies it needs to produce, or not. Although natural selection favors the generation of antibodies that will consistently beat any virus and his cousin, the ones an immune system decides to put in circulation may be geared toward a part of the virus that varies easily.  Worse, a compromised immune system will still replicate virus and over time select copies that are increasingly antibody resistant. So, like the folks in the clinical trials, we won’t know the true resilience of COVID survivors until those under study have been a year post recovery.

Theoretically, aiming each of several vaccines at narrowly selected targets should out-perform natural immunity for a significant time. But, we just have to let the horses round the back stretch to be sure.

[yknot]

4 hours ago, qwazse said:

So, we are certain about the six month mark because that’s how long most everyone in the trials had to be before the FDA would offer emergency authorization. For the few folks who had been in each trial for more than six months, everyone was still testing positive at the same rate, but the placebo group was still coming down with moderate or severe COVID-19 symptoms many times more frequently than the vaccinated group. We will know in May if that holds true for everyone who completes the trial. Based on the marginal rates so far, my money is on the vaccine. But, as a statistician over the years, I’ve seen a few pre-hatched eggs over-counted.

Natural immunity is a crap shoot. One would think that there ain’t nothing like the real thing, but viruses call B.S. on that line of reasoning. A body may commit to memory the antibodies it needs to produce, or not. Although natural selection favors the generation of antibodies that will consistently beat any virus and his cousin, the ones an immune system decides to put in circulation may be geared toward a part of the virus that varies easily.  Worse, a compromised immune system will still replicate virus and over time select copies that are increasingly antibody resistant. So, like the folks in the clinical trials, we won’t know the true resilience of COVID survivors until those under study have been a year post recovery.

Theoretically, aiming each of several vaccines at narrowly selected targets should out-perform natural immunity for a significant time. But, we just have to let the horses round the back stretch to be sure.

These are some of the arguments against herd immunity, which is a seriously misapplied term from production animal medicine  where it really refers to either vaccination or slaughter. Vaccines can not only mount a better immune response than natural infection they can also help better avoid undesirable sequelae.  

[qwazse]

Just heard good news from my pandemic guy that although one or two folks have tested positive after the 1st dose, he hasn’t seen any positive tests from 2nd dose recipients at our institution. This would be priority cases ... senior care centers and the nurses, administrators, and service staff who work there. These folks are being screened regularly.

This is info beyond the clinical trial results, which could not test the “cluster efficacy” of a vaccine. If he gets it into open access, I’ll share.

Generally, after roll-out, vaccine efficacy can vary wildly from community to community. So, if multiple centers show similar results it will give a sense of the minimal percentage of vaccinated people needed to halt virus transmission in a cluster.

[SSScout]

The deniers all need to be strapped to a chair, have their eyelids taped open and made to watch "Influenza 1918 " on PBS. 

 Herd immunity?  easy to obtain. Let the virus kill off everyone who is NOT resistant . Presto, everyone left is resistant/immune (maybe). Might take 40 or 50 million  early deaths, no problem. 

Vaccine? They had none in 1918-1919.  The two or three global  sweeps of the viral epidemic (when did the term "Pandemic"  come into use?) took care of that. See  previous sentence.   

Maybe the Hong Kong or Swine Flu.  Does the conquering of Polio count?   There were folks back then that debated the "value" of  the various vaccines.  Were they even necessary? 

No worse than the "regular " flu?   Ask the folks that became cyanotic and died drowning in their own pneumonia within days of first symptoms.  Our present medical science can help alleviate and even prevent such, but not in all.  Did not have that back in 1918.

Can't wait?  Don't see the use of preventive measures like masks and distance and hand washing and "sneeze" barriers?   Don't worry ""It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear. ""  Just trust him.  He knows....

 

 

I want to buy Dr. Fauci a beer. 

 

 

[qwazse]

2 hours ago, SSScout said:

... Herd immunity?  easy to obtain. Let the virus kill off everyone who is NOT resistant . Presto, everyone left is resistant/immune (maybe). Might take 40 or 50 million  early deaths, no problem. ...

@SSScout 40 million US deaths would be unlikely even in the worst case scenario. There's no need for hyperbole. A single-cause mortality of 4 in 10K is a bad year on the epidemiologist's yardstick. Someone asked me why we would treat a rate of .0005 as if it were Ebola. So, I looked it up. Over two years, Sierra Leone saw 3956 Ebola deaths in a population of 7.1 million ... 5.57 in 10K or .000557.  Some of our states are wishing they only had Ebola-like mortality.

Edited February 15, 2021 by qwazse

[CynicalScouter]

I have watched in shocked horror as Scouters post to Facebook and elsewhere their units running around without masks. When it is pointed out that BSA has as an official policy masks must be worn, they laugh. "Fake News"
 

Quote

We ask that everyone in Scouting follow the basic guidelines listed below, which are based on the CDC’s guidance for the general public. In addition, we’ve instructed local councils to consult with their local and state health departments, as well as local chartered partners, in order to implement appropriate protocols to help keep members, volunteers, and employees safe in their respective communities.

...

• Wear a face covering or mask that covers your nose and mouth to help protect yourself and others.

...

Please review the Restart Scouting Checklist for additional information. 

 

 

Edited February 15, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[CynicalScouter]

One tid bit worth noting. BSA has made it clear they are NOT going to mandate a vax.
 

Quote

♦ Q.  Will the National Council require a COVID-19 vaccine for participants at in-person activities or at camp in 2021?

There are no current plans by the BSA to nationally require a COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 for in-person activities or camp due mainly to the limited availability of the vaccine in many areas and the fact that currently available vaccines are not approved for use by individuals younger than 16. We recommend that each individual consults their health care provider for guidance regarding vaccination.

Edited February 15, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[SSScout]

27 minutes ago, qwazse said:

@SSScout 40 million US deaths would be unlikely even in the worst case scenario. There's no need for hyperbole. A single-cause mortality of 4 in 10K is a bad year on the epidemiologist's yardstick. Someone asked me why we would treat a rate of .0005 as if it were Ebola. So, I looked it up. Over two years, Sierra Leone saw 3956 Ebola deaths in a population of 7.1 million ... 5.57 in 10K or .000557.  Some of our states are wishing they only had Ebola-like mortality.

Not US deaths, 1918-1919 deaths world wide.  Hyperbole is not needed, only to learn from the past.  To gain "Herd Immunity" ,naturally, without scientific help , all one has to do is wait. That is just about all folks could do world wide in 1918-1919. 

History of 1918 Flu Pandemic | Pandemic Influenza (Flu) | CDC  

 

[Sentinel947]

35 minutes ago, qwazse said:

@SSScout 40 million US deaths would be unlikely even in the worst case scenario. There's no need for hyperbole. A single-cause mortality of 4 in 10K is a bad year on the epidemiologist's yardstick. Someone asked me why we would treat a rate of .0005 as if it were Ebola. So, I looked it up. Over two years, Sierra Leone saw 3956 Ebola deaths in a population of 7.1 million ... 5.57 in 10K or .000557.  Some of our states are wishing they only had Ebola-like mortality.

Speaking of Ebola, there is an active outbreak in Guinea. 

[Eagle94-A1]

4 hours ago, SSScout said:

The deniers all need to be strapped to a chair, have their eyelids taped open and made to watch "Influenza 1918 " on PBS. 

Not everyone who does not want the vaccine is a denier. A lot of folks in the medical field have reservations about the vaccines. One of them stated that they had serious questions about one company's study methodology after reading a peer reviewed  medical journal article on the vaccine. Others have questions about the efficacy of the vaccine, and whether it will really make a difference or not based upon their reading of the ongoing research of the virus. I have read of hospitals offer bonuses in the form of cash and extra days off as an incentive for their staff to get the vaccine.

 

Trust me they know it's real. They know they have to be cautious. But they have legitimate concerns because these vaccine have been fast tracked. They do not know what long term effects the vaccines will have.

[elitts]

On 2/11/2021 at 9:12 PM, 5thGenTexan said:

Yeah, I am hesitant.  I needed Tetanus for Part C last Fall.  Got it on a Monday morning and I had a fever for the next 4 days in addition to sleeping a lot.  That was just Tdap.  I am worried this one might kill me. 

Tetanus is generally considered a "bad one" for immediate side effects.  I just got a booster about a year ago and for about 2-3 days afterwards my arm felt like somebody had smashed me with a baseball bat and I had a low grade fever.  Fortunately none of my flu or pneumonia vaccines ever did that.

[RememberSchiff]

35 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Not everyone who does not want the vaccine is a denier. A lot of folks in the medical field have reservations about the vaccines. One of them stated that they had serious questions about one company's study methodology after reading a peer reviewed  medical journal article on the vaccine. Others have questions about the efficacy of the vaccine, and whether it will really make a difference or not based upon their reading of the ongoing research of the virus. I have read of hospitals offer bonuses in the form of cash and extra days off as an incentive for their staff to get the vaccine.

 

Trust me they know it's real. They know they have to be cautious. But they have legitimate concerns because these vaccine have been fast tracked. They do not know what long term effects the vaccines will have.

Good point. I recall the swine flu fiasco of 1976.. 

https://www.history.com/news/swine-flu-rush-vaccine-election-year-1976

Due to the incomplete ( and wrong) science at that time and fear of unexplained possible side-effects such as Guillain-Barre Syndrome , I and 80% of the US did not get the flu shot that year. Here's a photo of one of few, an unidentified Eagle Scout, who did get a swine flu shot.

That said, I will get my covid vaccination as soon as my turn comes - Feb? March?  June? August?

 

 

[swilliams]

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Not everyone who does not want the vaccine is a denier. A lot of folks in the medical field have reservations about the vaccines. One of them stated that they had serious questions about one company's study methodology after reading a peer reviewed  medical journal article on the vaccine. Others have questions about the efficacy of the vaccine, and whether it will really make a difference or not based upon their reading of the ongoing research of the virus. I have read of hospitals offer bonuses in the form of cash and extra days off as an incentive for their staff to get the vaccine.

 

Trust me they know it's real. They know they have to be cautious. But they have legitimate concerns because these vaccine have been fast tracked. They do not know what long term effects the vaccines will have.

There are also those of us who have been infected already, and are waiting to see what observation and studies say about extended immunity, and who want to see if any longer-term effects start to show up.  At this point, having already had Covid, I have no intention of getting the vaccine.  That may change; it may not.

For full disclosure, I have a relative who was vaccine-injured.  This doesn't mean my family and I are anti-vaxx, or deniers, or any other delightful names we've been called.  My children are all vaccinated with the exception of not having been given the rotavirus or HPV vaccines.  But we're cautious, and tend to base decisions on likely effects of both illness and vaccine, efficacy, and other related issues.  At this point, it's moot for my kids, as they are 16, 14 and almost 13 (a few more days).  But I would like to kindly suggest those out there, as passionate as you may be,  to please temper the urge to call those who choose NOT to take the vaccine 'deniers' or 'anti-vaxxers'.